Friday, October 17, 2008

Sitting in my room, eating biscuits..

Being quite happy it's not so cold. I've taken a break in my Buffy watching to explore the internets.

My workplace runs confidence building courses for women. We thought we'd try and find a nice visual for the power point slides. We thought wouldn't a Wonder Woman picture be well, wonderful?

You try finding a picture of Wonder Woman looking confident, just confident, self assured. Oh there's a few where she's fighting, deflecting bullets with her wrists and whatnot. But they don't shout confident to me, they shout dangerous, (OK maybe not the second link)

Then there's pretty much only sexyones. Orraunchy, as one of my colleagues commented.Even this one, where I think Diana and Lois look awesome and super relaxed, is too sexy to use. Adam Hughes art was the worst for this.We eventually opted for a Lynda Carter photo, then remembered copyright issues and thought, hmm, maybe not.Now something is wrong there. If (approx) 95% of the images found are of a sexed up Diana, and there are none, and I could find none, of a straight forward confident, relaxed, comfortable in herself Diana of the Amazons, then something is up. Can she only be depicted sexy? Why is that the overriding factor in most of the art? Why can't she be self assured without basking in her hotness?

Is it her costume or is it the style of artist? Lynda Carter looked bold and proud without being too raunchy, so maybe not the costume.

Is it that women can only be drawn and viewed in terms of their hotness? Is it that their hotness is the most important factor and all other character traits secondary? I'm starting to think so.

Thoughts anyone?

I know that sometimes sexy is part of confidence, but a sexy image wouldn't be appropriate to assist with teaching our clients how to be confident. It gives out the wrong message - you don't have to be hot to be confident. It seems a shame there is nothing out there that shows this.

Note: I am not against sexy images, I am against one overriding style of images. I want diversity dammit.

10 comments:

In superhero comics? From the Big Two? You might as well look for fish in the middle of the desert. ;)

Thoughts anyone?

Honestly, it's because of the kind of stories superhero comics represent. They are "pulp-action fantasy" stories. Action and sexiness are the two main ingredients.

Also, since I'm guessing you are looking on the internet for these images, you fail to take into account that most sites and forums know they have mere milliseconds to grab the attention of their views, before they click away to something else. What's more likely to get the attention: a sexy or action oriented image, or some "confindent" (whatever THAT means) posed one? I don't think you need a degree in marketing to figure it out.

Finally, as tired as you might be of hearing it (because I can certainly say I'm tired of having to say it), most superhero comics (including ones with female leads) are my by men, to men, for men. And, so, going back to point two, what is more likely to grab their attentions: something action-y and/or sexy, or what it is you were looking for?

Thus, to find what it is you were craving, is going to require lots and lots of digging. It's out there, I'm sure, but it is buried due to any (or ALL) of the reasons I've stated.

But, to show I'm not an all bad sort, here's a link to an image that might fit your bill (at least, I think it does, and I hope you agree): http://comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=417870&GSub=63619

Good point, well made, re the medium of the internet images."most superhero comics (including ones with female leads) are my by men, to men, for men."Yep, hear it all the time. No problem with you saying it again though :)I know a lot of the issues I have come at least in part from the fact DC make comics for men, by men. Having said that, I notice a lot of female names in the editorials and on the credits of the comics, so that's makes me wonder just how many women do work there, and what the dynamic is like. But without working there I shall never know. (That'll be a first, me not speculating on something..)I still reserve my right to complain about the male centric view though.

I realise I didn't explain properly what I meant by confident, I was rather tired and not good at articulating. (Still can't explain though, and I'm not tired anymore!)

Re the link: I see what you're saying about the posing etc, but she's not wearing any underwear!

My room is like a shrine to kick ass awesome female chars in kick ass awesome poses :D I have Rinoa, Supergirl, Wonder Woman, Catwoman over my bed, the "Real Power of the DC Universe" poster and a Supergirl print by Agnes Garbowska over my computer desk and a wall scroll of Tifa and the Final Fantasy X-2 heroines on my other walls :D

In my questing for awesome posters tho (b/c my walls are blank and boring and I luff cool posters) I have noticed that it's rly hard for me to find posters of female heroes that aren't just made for the male gaze and that are more focussed on them being heroes and heroic (b/c hay that's who they are) than just eye candy. :\ But when I do, I always buy it :]

My room is very inspiring :) Plus the posters literally were used by my therapist as a way to make myself feel safe while I was recovering from.. what was done to me.. last winter :( Having Wonder Woman and Supergirl in kickass poses guarding you as you try to sleep without being triggered or crying or reliving it in the dark was actually a good technique.. at least for me :)

I notice a lot of female names in the editorials and on the credits of the comics, so that's makes me wonder just how many women do work there, and what the dynamic is like.

That would be interesting to know. Perhaps this is something you should think about asking some female insiders, the next time you are at a comicon, or maybe even email them about it, if you can. Their answers could be very enlightening to the whole process.

I still reserve my right to complain about the male centric view though.

Oh, sure. Just remeber that the "male centric view" in and of itself is not an evil thing. Like much else, it is just a tool. What it does, depends on the one using it. A hammer is supposed to build, which is good. But it can also be used to smash in a person's skull, which is bad (generally speaking). It's no different for the male centric view.

I see what you're saying about the posing etc, but she's not wearing any underwear!

I know, I'm never happy ;)Great expression though!

>Sigh< Just no pleasing some people. ;)

And she could have underwear on. It would be a thong type, which would ride up over her hip and be covered by her metal waistband you see, but she could still have them. And that's coming from a "male centric viewpoint," too. ;)

@ Ami:I do like that WW poster you linked to. I want that Adam Hughes Power Girl poster where she's flying on her back:http://www.hillcity-comics.com/poster_misc/powergirl.jpgI LOVE her expression, like she's saying, go on, try anything, like you could ever touch me.I've also got women of the DCU poster, after I eventually found it on ebay. They're all sexy in that poster too, but it makes sense, it's in context as they're dressing up for a big event. It's not gratuitous.Re having the posters guard you, that's interesting, I wonder how common it is that people use techniques like that. I hate flying, used to be really scared of it, slowly getting better, but in order to make myself feel better and safer about it I always wear either my Superman or Wonder Woman pants when I'm flying. Just makes me feel safer about it all.

@James:Sadly we don't really have comicons in the UK. I think there's one that comes to London every year but i don't know if it's like the ones you have in the USA, with panels of industry people etc. I am gonna try and go next year though.Emailing DC is a good idea, I wonder if they'd respond. Gotta be worth a try!

I know the male centric view is not in and of it self a bad thing. There are some really good comics produced in a male dominated industry and do treat their women characters well - Manhunter (of course that's now cancelled), Huntress year 1 mini, Alex Ross' art, Renato Guedes art, Peter David's Supergirl run, the current Superman books, Wonder Woman - the Hiketeia, the Buffy season 8 books.See I'm not all doom and gloom, I do recognise the good stuff!

My beef is that it so often results in women being displayed in terms of their looks over their other attributes. Which I think you will probably have gathered by now!Of course that's a very heterocentric analysis and I'm ignoring gay men in this, but I still think it's worth noting as I believe that in most (Western) cultures, the straight male gaze that commodifies and objectifies women and is the prevailing viewpoint.I'm gonna be railing against stuff for a long time aren't I?

Re the WW pic you linked to, if she's wearing a thong that we can't see she might as well be wearing no pants at all! There's no need for her arse to be on display, it's gratuitous.Anyway thongs are uncomfortable and purely about looking hot.

Sadly we don't really have comicons in the UK. I think there's one that comes to London every year but i don't know if it's like the ones you have in the USA, with panels of industry people etc. I am gonna try and go next year though.

Well, even if the "top brass" aren't there, I'm sure plenty of creators will be. Talking with them, perhaps they could point you in how to contact the women is the higher positions.

Of course, the main thing is you have a good time. That's what cimicons are supposed to be about. :)

My beef is that it so often results in women being displayed in terms of their looks over their other attributes. Which I think you will probably have gathered by now!

I can understand that. It's sort of how I feel regarding "chick flicks." Most of the men in them are either horrendous assholes, chest-thumping brutes, or whiney losers. They don't usually potray men in a flattering light, outside of perhaps their looks, either.

But what I do, is keep in mind that I'm not the target audience. That this is being made for women and will reflect what (some) women think about men and their nature. It isn't an indicment of what I am, or how I am. It's just some woman's idea of it. And ideas can be wrong. Ideas can be mistaken.

I feel it is the same with the male centric view in superhero comics. (Most of) The male creators who make them aren't out to demean or put down women. They aren't trying to say women are only good for "one thing." They are simply aiming their creative efforts towards the male audience, in a way that speaks to them and the feelings they might have. It is a male's idea of women and their nature, the same as the "chick flick" gives the women's idea of a man's. And as such, it can be wrong. That's why I don't take my "cues of life" from superhero comics.

I guess my beef with a lot of these "discussions" (and I use that term very loosely in many cases) of the topic, is that it makes the leap that because the IDEA exists, that men will always act on it. That because a female superhero might be shown more in terms of her looks, than her abilities, that men automatically think that about real women and will EXPECT that from real women. I don't think that's the case.

Sure, you have some assholes who will be that way. But I somehow doubt that got those ideas from a comic (especially superhero ones). Men... PEOPLE... who hold to such beliefs, usually do so from something seeded much deeper than the fantasy entertainment of a comic. So all the hemming and hawwing about how superhero comics need to be more "gender neutral," or more concerned with the fantasy they present, is really going after the wrong end of things, in my view. What you need to change is how real people treat REAL people, not ones of fantasy and ink. And making superhero comicss have the female characters "less sexified" isn't going to change the core problem/issue.

Jim Balent drawing Catwoman, or having Wonder Woman in a thong, isn't going to make men disrespect real women. And if those things were taken away, it wouldn't make things any better, in any way that counts. It wouldn't stop those who would do so, because their reasons for doing it go much deeper than a comic they might have read.

But that's just MY opinion. I could be wrong. (And I hope Dennis Miller doesn't sue me for using his famous catchphrase. ;))

I'm gonna be railing against stuff for a long time aren't I?

Only if you believe that railing against a fantasy of paper and ink, is going to change how real people treat each other. If you truly believe that, then yes, you are going to be railing about this for a long time, because the TRUE issue/problem will not be getting addressed.

We don't have to like every fantasy that is created (I know I don't). But we haven't the right to say what ones should and shouldn't exist, simply because we fear what an unstable mind might do with it, or how it might act on it. And we certainly don't have the right to make our personal annoyances into an issue the whole world needs to change over.

Re: the WW pic you linked to, if she's wearing a thong that we can't see she might as well be wearing no pants at all! There's no need for her arse to be on display, it's gratuitous.

Well, I wasn't serious about the thong. It was more of a joke, because of how picky you were being (by your own admittion, no less). ;)

But, as the person who is the official rep for the artist of that piece (and being the one who maintains and updates that gallery of artists), I can tell you that the artist didn't draw her outfit that way, because of wanting to be gratuitous. He felt it was a way to express her Greek heritage, as people from ancient times, from that region of the world, would have worn a skirt flap like that.

You should have seen his Hawkman and Hawkgirl, which he done in an ancient Egyptian style of dress. It was awesome.

But this does go to prove my point, that what you see as being done to demean women (i.e. the outfit was done that way to be gratuitiously sexy only) is not actually what the artist was going for. While your feelings about the outfit are valid, that doesn't mean they are correct. And that, more than anything else, is where so many go "off the rails" in this discussion. That what they feel automatically equals reality. But as I've often found, that usually isn't the case. The truth lies between the extremes, just like compromise does. Funny thing that, wouldn't you say? ;)

Finally, I get some time to respond!This may go off onto more general ramble rather than a direct response by the way..

I appreciate I may not appear to be the target audience for a lot of comics, being female and critical and all, but I think that,a) it doesn't matter who the target audience is, if something is sexist or offensive it should be critiqued.Something I would imagine you agree with? Of course you do need to understand the reasons behind why something is sexist, or the processes leading to it's creation, before you can put forward a fully informed critique.b)*if* the editors or powers that be really think that women aren't in the target audience then they should open their eyes a little. I appreciate that marketing experts rely on stereoytpes and gross generalisations (actually I don't know that for a fact, I'm just guessing) to decide how to sell a product (and that whole process does annoy me as well) but there is no reason why something cannot be sexist and still appeal to men. (Of course, marketing technique is a whole different discussions) You can still have cheesecake, but it needs to be more balanced with the non demeaning stuff. As evidence of non cheesecake stuff sellign well, I offer up Huntress year 1, Manhunter (or maybe not...)Runaways, Peter David's Supergirl run, Mike Grells' run of Green Arrow.I should be the target audience for comics as I like explosions and sci fi and robots and powers etc.

Regarding the fantasy vs reality thing. I agree, seeing women objectified in comics does not mean men (or women) then go out to objectify women in real life, and people who claim that the process is as simple as that are, I believe, misguided.

HOWEVER, I think attitudes in society are reflected in our media and our popular culture. When things are sexist (or racist, or bigoted in any way etc) then that is wrong and should be fixed.The question is, how to fix it? Do we do a top down or bottom up approach? I think we should do both. And amending the way women are portrayed in comics is one top down way of doing so.

Note: I don't want to get rid of all cheesecake, I want it in context and not gratuitous, I want it to make sense to the story or the setting, and I want an alternative. Which, to be fair, we are getting, see those books listed above I mentioned.I guess what I want is for porny art to not be the default (and i know you disagree with the porn related to comic art stuff, but you get what I mean).

I knew you were teasing re the WW thong :) And yes, I was being picky and I'll say again her pose and expression were great :)I'll have a look round the gallery, you have piqued my interest.I appreciate I jump the gun sometimes (a lot?) and I know I'm not always correct and I do misinterpret stuff, and I hope that I'm happy to be proved wrong.I know artists don't usually (there are always exceptions but I'd assume they are very rare) go for purposefully demeaning stuff, with the intention to demean, but when they do and it is unintentional I think that shows just how much these attitudes are ingrained into society and individual's worldviews. And that's sad, and the wrong stuff needs to be pointed out.Sometimes it's a valid criticism, sometimes it's not.

Whew, well i feel like I've chewed your ear off enough about that for the moment! Thanks for the discussion, (and I hope you'll agree this is a discussion)

Personally, WonderWoman's one of my faves. It doesn't matter to me if she's "dangerous"-she's a warrior after all.All that matters to me is that she has a conscience-i.e.the Max Lord inccident was a big one and impressed me while growing up.-ealperin